Literature Review

Glass ionomer cements in pediatric

dentistry: review of the literature
Theodore P. Croll, DDS

John W. Nicholson, PhD

Dr. Croll is in private practice, Doylestown, Pa, clinical professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, University of Pennsylvania
School of Dental Medicine, clinical professor, Craniofacial Growth and Development, University of Texas Health Science Center,
Houston, Tex, and adjunct professor, Pediatric Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Tex; at the time
of this writing, Dr. Nicholson was reader in biomaterials science and head, Department of Dental Biomaterials Science, Guys, Kings
and St Thomas Dental Institute, Kings College, London, England, and former head of Materials Research, Laboratory of the Government
Chemist, Teddington, England. He is currently professor of biomaterials chemistry, University of Greenwich, Chatham, Kent, England.
Correspond with Dr. Croll at willipus@tradenet.net

Abstract
Glass ionomer cement systems have become important dental restorative and luting
materials for use in preschoolers, children and teenagers. These materials form chemical
bonds to tooth structure, are biocompatible, release fluoride ions for uptake by enamel
and dentin, and are able to take up fluoride ions from dentifrices, mouthwashes, and
topically applied solutions. Unlike early glass ionomers, the new cement systems are easy
and practical to use. Resin-modified glass ionomer cements not only have improved
physical characteristics, but the photopolymerizable resin component reduces initial
hardening time substantially. This article reviews the development and history of glass
polyalkenoate cement systems and their ongoing role in dentistry for children.(Pediatr
Dent. 2002;24:423-429)
KEYWORDS: PEDIATRIC RESTORATIVE DENTISTRY, GLASS IONOMER CEMENT, LITERATURE REVIEW

lass polyalkenoate cements, are materials made of

calcium or strontium aluminofluorosilicate glass
powder (base) combined with a water soluble polymer (acid). Kent called such materials glass ionomer
cements, and that name has become part of the dental vernacular. 1 Glass ionomers were invented in 1969 and
reported by Wilson and Kent in the early 1970s.2,3
Glass ionomer cement components, when mixed together, undergo a setting reaction involving neutralization
of the acid groups by the powdered solid glass base. Without diminution of physical properties of the hardened
cement, significant amounts of fluoride ions are released
during this reaction.
There has been some confusion as to what dental restorative materials or luting cements can be considered glass
ionomer cements. McLean, Nicholson and Wilson suggested nomenclature which succinctly defined the respective
materials.4 They noted that polyacid-modified resin-based
composites, commonly called compomers, are light-polymerized resins containing basic glass filler and acid
functional groups. Such materials harden by
photopolymerization. Once moisture (saliva) saturates the

Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

hardened resin, the glass ionomer components do react and

release some fluoride, but this reactivity occurs within the
polymerized resin.
Another type of material is resin-based composite that
incorporates large particles of hardened glass ionomer cement within its mass. This type of material does not bond
to tooth structure like a glass ionomer cement, releases little
fluoride and has polymerization contraction of the constituent resin. Two other types of true glass ionomer materials
are those modified by inclusion of metal (for example, glass
ionomer silver cermet cement) and those with a light-polymerized liquid resin component that renders the cement
photocurable as part of the overall hardening reaction. These
resin-modified glass ionomer cements have gained much
interest and use in pediatric dentistry over the last decade.
The term glass ionomer cement should be applied only
to a material that involves a significant acid-base reaction
as part of its setting reaction, where the acid is a watersoluble polymer and the base is a special glass.4-6 Berg,7
Albers,8 and Ewoldsen and Herwig9 expertly elucidated the
vast array of modern adhesive restorative materials.

Glass ionomer cement

Croll, Nicholson 423

Original self-hardening
glass ionomer cements
The setting of these self-hardening glass ionomer materials
has been described as follows:5
As the cements set, water becomes incorporated into the
material, and there is no phase separation. In fact, water has
been identified as having a number of roles:
1. It is the solvent for the setting reaction, because, without it, the polymeric acid would be unable to exhibit
its full properties as an acid.
2. It is one of the reaction products.
3. It acts as both coordinating species to the metal ions
released from the glass and as hydrating species at welldefined sites around the polyanion.
4. It may act as a plasticizer and reduce the rigidity of the
bulk polymeric structure.
The setting reactions of glass ionomer cements are:6
1. Initial decomposition of the glass under the influence
of the aqueous polyacid, leading to the release of calcium and aluminum ions. The latter ions are less
readily released, probably because they have existed in
the glass as complex oxyanions.
2. Rapid reaction of the calcium ions with the polyacid
chains, followed by later reaction of aluminum ions
species, reflecting the more gradual release of the latter ion from its anionic complex. Reaction of metal ions
with the carboxylic acid groups displaces water from
some of the hydration sites, and leads to some ionic
cross-linking of the polyacid chains. Both of these effects lead to insolubilization of the polymer and
stiffening of the material.
3. Gradual reconstruction of the inorganic fragments also
released in step 1 to yield a matrix of increasing
strength, greater resistance to desiccation, and improved translucency.
The original glass polyalkenoate formulations developed
in the 1970s failed to gain much interest from dental clinicians treating children. Those materials required extended
setting time, were susceptible to dissolution or desiccation
during the hardening reaction and, once hardened, had poor
wear resistance and poor fracture strengths. Regardless of
the advantages of (1) fluoride ion release and uptake, (2)
coefficients of thermal expansion similar to that of tooth
structure, (3) biocompatibility, and (4) chemical bonding
to both enamel and dentin, dentists were not about to adopt
materials that took longer to use, were difficult to handle,
and proved unreliable in the long term because of poor
durability.
The speed of the hardening reaction and ultimate
strength of a glass ionomer formulation depends on powder/liquid ratio of the components, molar mass of the
polyacid and its concentration, and the presence of chelating agents such as tartaric acid. Researchers discovered that
inclusion of tartaric acid made it possible to use different
compositions of glass so that the hardened cements were
more translucent. Besides improving tooth-color matching

424

Croll, Nicholson

in comparison to the early opaque glass ionomers, incorporation of tartaric acid also made the hardening reaction
faster and more definitive.10,11 These improvements made
glass ionomer materials more attractive and practical for the
clinician.

Classification of glass ionomer materials

Glass ionomer cements used for children and teens can be
categorized as restorative cements, including liner/base
materials, or luting cements. Restorative cements can be further described as self hardening or partially light hardening,
metal modified, and resin modified. Glass ionomer luting
cements are self hardening, and some are modified with
resin. In addition, there are some instances in which a
photocurable resin-modified glass ionomer restorative cement can be used with a lower powder/liquid ratio to serve
as a luting cement. Such material is ideal for cementing orthodontic bands and space maintainers.12
In the 1980s, with the goal of creating stronger and more
durable glass ionomer materials, one manufacturer added
silver amalgam powder to the glass powder (Miracle Mix,
GC America, Inc., Alsip, Ill). Another combined the glass
powder with elemental silver (cermet) by a process of highheat fusion (sintering) (Ketac-Silver, 3M ESPE, St. Paul,
Minn, formerly ESPE, Seefeld, Fed. Rep. Germany).13-15
Adding fibers to reinforce experimental cements was also
investigated.16
The addition of silver had the advantage of increasing
radiopacity of the cements. In addition, wear resistance of
the silver cermet cement was somewhat improved over traditional glass ionomer restorative material. However,
fracture resistance and fracture toughness of the metal-modified materials are still too low to recommend the materials
for stress-bearing regions of teeth, and the gray color precluded routine use of the cermet in anterior teeth.
Despite its disadvantages, Ketac-Silver did establish a
modest niche for itself in pediatric dentistry as a silver amalgam substitute in certain cases.17,18 Use of the silver cermet
cement in children decreased greatly with introduction of
tooth-colored, resin-modified glass ionomers in the early
1990s.

Resin-modified glass
ionomer restorative cements
An important advancement in glass ionomer technology that
has influenced dentistry for children is development of the
resin-modified glass ionomer systems. Vitrabond (now
spelled Vitrebond), a resin-modified glass ionomer base/
liner, was introduced by 3M Dental Products Division.19-21
Vitrebond is supplied in a powder/liquid format and needs
to be spatulated by hand. The liquid polyacid component
includes a photopolymerizable resin which hardens the
material substantially when a visible light beam is applied.
Once the resin component has been cured, the glass ionomer
hardening reaction continues, protected from moisture and
overdrying by the hard resin framework. On command

Glass ionomer cement

Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

light-hardening in about 40 seconds makes Vitrebond a

practical and valuable dentin replacement.
This material has been on the market for over 13 years
and is known for: (1) preventing postoperative sensitivity
when placed under direct application resin-based composite restorations, thus protecting against bacterial access to
dentinal tubules, (2) its internal fluoride ion release,22 and
(3) its antimicrobial action.23-25 Although made for dentin
replacement, Vitrebond proved useful in children for
nonstressbearing restoration of primary teeth.26,27
Light-hardened, resin-modified glass ionomer restorative
cements were introduced in the early 1990s. Two of these
materials were provided in predosed disposable capsules
(Photac-Fil, [3M ESPE, and Fuji II LC, GC), and the other
was available only in bottles for hand spatulation (Vitremer,
3M). Fuji II LC was also available in a hand-mixed version.
Like Vitrebond, the resin-modified glass ionomer restorative
cements harden initially by free radical photopolymerization
of the resin component in the formulation. Forty seconds
of visible light beam exposure substantially hardens these
cements initially, and a chemical resin polymerization reaction and the glass ionomer setting reaction subsequently
progress. Addition of the resin component within the glass
ionomer formula not only decreases initial hardening time
and handling difficulties, but substantially increases wear
resistance and physical strengths of the cement.28-30
Fracture toughness, fracture resistance, and resistance to
wear are all improved in the resin-modified glass ionomers.
In addition, the major advantages of glass ionomers (fluoride ion hydrodynamics, biocompatibility, favorable thermal
expansion and contraction properties, and physiochemical
bonding to tooth structure) are retained.
It was discovered that, to achieve the best physical properties of resin-modified glass ionomer restorative cement,
the mixture required the highest powder/liquid ratio possible, but with assurance that all the glass powder was
thoroughly wetted with the acid solution during spatulation. 31-34 Such a mixture was possible only with the
hand-spatulated cement. It should also be noted that there
are differences in physical properties of the various brands
that are not related only to powder/liquid ratios.35 Even
though some reports of glass ionomer materials have not
been favorable,36,37 these were related to self-hardening glass
ionomer materials whose physical properties vary greatly
from the resin-modified glass ionomers. Clinical reports and
clinical research articles after 1993 have reported and documented much success with resin-modified glass ionomer
systems.38-47

Fluoride ion release and uptake

When one considers the role of fluoride in preventive dentistry, it is easy to consider glass ionomer cement systems as
therapeutic materials. Fluoride ions are not only released by
glass ionomer systems, but also taken up by associated
enamel and dentin, rendering that tooth structure less susceptible to acid challenge by a combination of decreased

Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

tooth structure solubility and disruption of bacterial activity that produces organic acids.9,19,22-25,48-67 It has been shown
that glass ionomer materials are able to release fluoride at a
sustained rate for long periods of time (at least 5 years).48,62
Also, being water-based systems, they act as continuing fluoride ion reservoirs in the mouth by taking in salivary fluoride
from dentifrices, mouthwashes and topical fluoride solutions
at the dental office.66,67 Fluoride ion release and uptake associated with all the glass ionomer systems, while useful for
all young patients, are particularly advantageous for those
with high susceptibility to dental caries.

Glass ionomer luting cements

Early glass ionomer luting cements were commercially more
successful than the restorative cements. Their physical
strengths were sufficient for cementing stainless steel crowns,
space maintainers, and individual stainless steel orthodontic bands. The added benefit of fluoride ion transfer was also
an attractive advantage for caries-prone orthodontic patients.68,69 Resin-modifed glass ionomer luting cements
contain monomers that undergo polymerization together
with initiators similar to those used in cold-cure acrylics (eg,
benzoyl peroxide with amine accelerator). With increased
physical strengths associated with inclusion of the resin component, these easy-to-use, adhesively bonded luting cements
have gained much popularity.5,70,71
Dentists treating children find the photopolymerized,
resin-modified glass ionomer luting cements especially useful for orthodontic bands and stainless steel crown
cementation.12 The curing light beam directed upon the
occlusal surface of the tooth irradiates through tooth structure and hardens the cement held by the band against the
axial tooth surfaces. Light hardening the luting cement in
this manner takes minutes off the time required to cement
each stainless steel band. In addition, the cement has high
physical strengths and is virtually insoluble, so band loosening is most uncommon. Its only minor disadvantage is
that the bonded cement sometimes needs to be cut with a
bur for detachment from the enamel surface when the band
or orthodontic device is removed. Light-hardened resinmodified glass ionomer luting cement is essentially the
restorative cement blended with a slightly lower powder/liquid ratio.

Glass ionomer/resin-based
composite stratification
One cannot comprehensively review glass ionomer cement
systems for use in children and adolescents without discussing the technique of restoring a tooth with a combination
of glass ionomer dentin replacement and bonded resin-based
composite enamel replacement. This method has been called
lamination, the sandwich technique or stratification.
Since McLean and Wilson first suggested individualized
dentin and enamel restoration, there has been much advocacy for the concept.30,72-90 Development of the lighthardened glass ionomer systems has made placement of a

Glass ionomer cement

Croll, Nicholson 425

glass ionomer liner/base much easier and quicker and, therefore, more practical.
Based on principles of biomimesis90-92 (replacement of
tissue or a part using materials that most closely replicate
original essence), it can be argued that the properties of certain glass ionomer cements make them the best direct
application dentin replacement material ever available.
When overlaid with appropriate adhesively bonded resinbased composite, a resin-modified glass ionomer dentin
replacement layer also virtually guarantees that there will be
no post-operative tooth sensitivity for the young patient.

The future for glass ionomers

in pediatric dentistry

Bioactivity of glass ionomers

In recent years, the ability of glass ionomers to release ions
apart from fluoride, notably calcium and aluminum, has
been studied, and there is evidence to show that they promote remineralization of the tooth.95 This seems to be
related to their ability to buffer lactic acid,96 an effect that
was originally thought to be negative, because of its association with loss of cement by erosion.97 However, very
recently, it has been found that lactic acid at the pH of active caries (4.5) can be buffered to the pH of arrested caries
(5.5) within less than 30 seconds, and with negligible erosion.98 This effect is likely to be beneficial, and would inhibit
the development of secondary caries around a glass ionomer
restoration.

Summary
In the last 15 years, manufacturers have worked diligently
to produce glass ionomer cement systems that have overcome the 3 chief disadvantages of this class of materials:
Croll, Nicholson

Disclaimer
The authors have no financial interest in any products or
manufacturers identified in this article.

Recommended reading

Clinical research is producing scientific evidence that certain resin-modified glass ionomer restorative cement systems
can give long-term reliability in dentistry for children.44,45,47
One might believe that self-hardening glass ionomer restorative cements are now impractical in comparision to their
light-hardened counterparts.
However, 2 encapsulated glass ionomer restorative cements have been introduced that harden by the conventional
acid/base neutralization reaction, but have much improved
physical properties compared to any other self-hardening
glass ionomer restorative cement. Ketac-Molar (3M ESPE)
and Fuji IX GP (GC) have a rapid set which significantly
reduces early moisture sensitivity. Faster hardening has been
achieved by altering the particle size and particle size distribution of the glass powder. Even newer versions of these
cements are now available (Ketac Molar Quick and Fuji IX
Fast) that require only about 120 seconds for significant
initial hardening.93 Such materials are ideal for certain uses
in primary teeth, interim restorations in permanent teeth,
long-term nonstressbearing restorations in permanent teeth,
and in the atraumatic restorative technique (ART). ART
has gained much interest internationally for patient populations who lack the advantages of modern dentistry.94

426

(1) difficult handling properties, (2) poor resistance to surface wear, and (3) poor resistance to fracture. They have
produced products that are improved to the point that these
major disadvantages have either been eliminated or reduced
to acceptable levels. The authors expect that improvements
will continue and that glass ionomer cement systems will
gain even more importance in restorative dentistry, preventive dentistry and orthodontics for young patients.

1. Wilson AD, McLean JW. Glass Ionomer Cement. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1988.
2. Mount GJ. An Atlas of Glass Ionomer Cements: A
Clinicians Guide. 3rd ed. London: Martin Dunitz; 2002.
3. Douglas WH, Lin CP. Strength of the new systems.
In Hunt PR, ed. Glass Ionomers: The Next Generation.
(Proceedings of the Second International Symposium
on Glass Ionomers.) Philadelphia: International Symposia in Dentistry, PC; 1994:209-216.
4. Albers HF. Tooth-Colored Restoratives. Santa Rosa,
Calif: Alto Book; 1996:iiia-c,iva,b.
5. Mount GJ, Hume WR. Preservation and Restoration of
Tooth Structure. London/Philadelphia/St. Louis:
Mosby International, Ltd; 1998.
6. Davidson CL, Mjr IA, eds. Advances in Glass Ionomer Cements. Berlin/Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1999.
7. Nicholson JW. The Chemistry of Medical Materials.
Cambridge, UK: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2002:vi.

References
1. Wilson AD, McLean JW. Glass Ionomer Cement. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1988:14.
2. Wilson AD, Kent BE. The glass ionomer cement: A
new translucent dental filling material. J Appl Chem
Biotechnol. 1971;21:313.
3. Wilson AD, Kent BE. A new translucent cement for
dentistry: The glass ionomer cement. Brit Dent J.
1972;132:133-135.
4. McLean JW, Nicholson JW, Wilson AD. Suggested
nomenclature for glass ionomer cements and related
materials (editorial). Quintessence Int. 1994;25:587-589.
5. Nicholson JW, Croll TP. Glass ionomers in restorative
dentistry. Quintessence Int. 1997;28:705-714.
6. Nicholson JW. Glass ionomers in medicine and dentistry. Proc Instn Mech Engrs. 1998;212(part H):121-126.
7. Berg JH. The continuum of restorative materials in pediatric dentistrya review for the clinician. Pediatr
Dent. 1998;20:93-100.
8. Albers HF. Fluoride containing restoratives. Adept Report.
1998;5:41-52.
9. Ewoldsen N, Herwig L. Decay-inhibiting restorative
materials: Past and present. Compend Cont Educ Dent.
1998;19:981-992.

Glass ionomer cement

Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

10. Crisp S, Ferner, AJ, Lewis, BG, Wilson AD. Properties of improved glass ionomer formulations. J Dent.
1975;3:125-130.
11. Wilson Ad, Crisp S, Ferner AJ. Reactions in glass
ionomer cements: IV. Effect of chelating comonomers.
J Dent Res. 1976;55:489-495.
12. Croll TP, Helpin ML. Space maintainer cementation
using light-hardened glass ionomer/resin restorative
cement. ASDC J Dent Child. 1994;61:246-248.
13. McLean JW, Gasser O. Glass-cermet cements.
Quintessence Int. 1985;16:333-343.
14. Wilson AD, McLean JW. Glass Ionomer Cement. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1988:30-33.
15. Croll TP, Killian CM. Glass ionomer-silver-cermet interim Class I restorations for permanent teeth.
Quintessence Int. 1992;23:731-733.
16. Oldfield CWB, Ellis B. Fibrous reinforcement of glass
ionomer cements. Clin Mater. 1993;7:313-322.
17. Croll TP, Phillips RW. Glass ionomersilver cermet
restorations for primary teeth. Quintessence Int.
1986;17:607-615.
18. Croll TP, Phillips RW. Six years experience with glass
ionomer-silver cermet cement. Quintessence Int.
1991;22:783-793.
19. Mitra SB, Creo AL. Fluoride release from light-cure
and self-cure glass ionomers. J Dent Res [Abstract
#739]. 1989;68:274.
20. Mitra SB. Property comparisons of a light-cure and a
self-cure glass ionomer liner. J Dent Res [Abstract
#740]. 1989;68:274.
21. Mitra SB. Adhesion to dentin and physical properties
of a light-cured glass ionomer liner/base. J Dent Res.
1991;70:72-74.
22. Tam LE, Chan GP-L, Yim D. In vitro caries inhibition effects by conventional and resin-modified glass
ionomer restorations. Oper Dent. 1997;22:4-14.
23. Scherer W, Lippman N, Kalm J, LoPresti J. Antimicrobial properties of VLC liners. J Esthet Dent.
1990;2:31-32.
24. Coogan MM, Creaven PJ. Antimicrobial effects of dental cements. Int Endod J. 1993;26:355-361.
25. Shelburne CE, Gleason RM, Mitra SB. Measurement
of microbial growth inhibition and adherence by glass
ionomers. J Dent Res [Abstract 211]. 1997;76:40.
26. Croll TP. Visible light-hardened glass ionomer cement
base/liner as an interim restorative material. Quintessence Int. 1991;22:137-141.
27. Croll TP. Glass ionomers for infants, children and adolescents. JADA. 1990;120:65-68.
28. Lin CP, Douglas WH, Mitra SB, Fields RP. Fracture
toughness of dental cements using the short rod
method. J Dent Res [Abstract #74]. 1992;71(special
issue):524.
29. Mitra SB, Kedrowski BL. Long-term mechanical properties of glass ionomers. Dent Mater. 1994;10:78-82.
30. Douglas WH, Lin CP. Strength of the new systems.
In Hunt PR, ed. Glass Ionomers: The Next Generation.
Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

31.

32.

33.

34.
35.
36.
37.

38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.

46.

47.

(Proceedings of the Second International Symposium

on Glass Ionomers.) Philadelphia: International Symposia in Dentistry, PC; 1994:209-216.
Quakenbush B, Donly K, Croll T. Powder/liquid ratio effects on solubility of a light-cured glass ionomer
cement. J Dent Res [Abstract # 410]. 1996;75(special
issue):69.
Grandgenett C, Donly K, Croll T. Filler particle percentage effects on compressive strength of a glass
ionomer hybrid. J Dent Res [Abstract #411]. 1996; 75
(special issue):69.
Quackenbush BM, Donly KJ, Croll TP. Powder/liquid ratio effects on caries inhibition of a light-cured
glass ionomer cement. J Dent Res [Abstract #645].
1997;76(special issue):94.
Quackenbush BM, Donly KJ, Croll TP. Solubility of
a resin-modified glass ionomer cement. ASDC J Dent
Child. 1998;65:310-312.
Kerby RE, Knobloch L, Thakur A. Strength properties of visible light-cured, resin-modified glass ionomer
cements. Oper Dent. 1997;22:79-83.
Mjr IA. Glass ionomer cement restorations and secondary caries: a preliminary report. Quintessence Int.
1996;27:171-174.
Qvist V, Laurberg L, Poulsen A, Teglers PT. Longevity and cariostatic effects of everyday conventional glass
ionomer and amalgam restorations in primary teeth:
3-year results. J Dent Res. 1997;76:1387-1396.
Croll TP, Killian CM. Visible light-hardened glass
ionomer-resin cement restorations for primary teeth:
new developments. Quintessence Int. 1992;23:679-682.
Croll TP, Killian CM. Glass ionomer-resin restoration
of primary molars with adjacent Class II carious lesions.
Quintessence Int. 1993;24:723-727.
Croll TP, Killian CM, Helpin ML. A restorative dentistry
renaissance for children: Light-hardened glass ionomer/
resin cement. ASDC J Dent Child. 1993; 60:89-94.
Croll TP. Restorative dentistry for preschool children.
Dent Clin N Amer. 1995;39:737-770.
Croll TP, Helpin ML. Class II Vitremer restoration of
primary molars. ASDC J Dent Child. 1995;62:17-21.
Uno S, Finger WJ, Fritz U. Long-term mechancial
characteristics of resin-modified glass ionomer materials. Dent Mater. 1996;12:64-69.
Donly KJ, Kanellis M, Segura A. Glass ionomer restorations in primary molars: 3-year clinical results. J Dent
Res [Abstract #223]. 1997;76(special issue):41.
Donly KJ, Segura A, Kanellis M, Erickson RC. Clinical performance and caries inhibition of resin-modified
glass ionomer cement and amalgam restorations.
JADA. 1999;130:1459-1466.
Croll TP, Helpin ML, Donly KJ. Vitremer restorative
cement for children: Three clinicians observations in
three pediatric dental practices. ASDC J Dent Child.
2000;67:391-398.
Croll TP, Bar Zion Y, Segura A, Donly, KJ. Clinical
performance of resin-modified glass ionomer cement

Glass ionomer cement

Croll, Nicholson 427

48.
49.
50.
51.
52.

53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.

64.
65.

428

restorations in primary teeth. A retrospective evaluation. JADA. 2001;132:1110-1116.

Forsten L. Fluoride release from a glass ionomer cement. Scand J Dent Res. 1977;85:503-504.
Swartz ML, Phillips RW, Clark HE. Long-term fluoride release from glass ionomer cements. J Dent Res.
1984;63:158-160.
Hicks MJ, Flaitz CM, Silverstone LM. Secondary caries formation in vitro around glass ionomer restorative
materials. Quintessence Int. 1986;17:527-532.
Berg JH, Donly KJ, Posnick WR. Glass ionomer-silver restoration: a demineralization/remineralization
concept. Quintessence Int. 1988;19:639-641.
Berg JH, Farrell JE, Brown LR. Class II glass ionomersilver cermet restorations and their effect on
interproximal growth of mutans streptococci. Pediatr
Dent. 1990;12:20-23.
Garca-Godoy F, Jensen ME. Artificial recurrent caries in glass ionomer-lined amalgam restorations. Am J
Dent. 1990;3:89-93.
Tyas MJ. Cariostatic effect of glass ionomer cements:
a five-year clinical study. Aust Dent J. 1991;36:236-239.
Griffin F, Donly KJ, Erickson RC. Caries inhibition
of three fluoride-releasing liners. Am J Dent. 1992;
5:293-295.
Donly KJ. Enamel and dentin demineralization inhibition of fluoride-releasing materials. Amer J Dent.
1994;7:275-278.
Souto M, Donly KJ. Caries inhibition of glass
ionomers. Amer J Dent. 1994;7:122-124.
Forsten L. Resin-modified glass ionomer cements:
Fluoride release and uptake. Acta Odontol Scand.
1995;53:222-225.
ten Cate JM, van Duinen RN. Hypermineralization
of dental lesions adjacent to glass ionomer cement restorations. J Dent Res. 1995;74:1266-1271.
Donly KJ, Ingram C. An in vitro caries inhibition of
photopolymerized glass ionomer liners. ASDC J Dent
Child. 1997;64:128-130.
Segura A, Donly KJ, Stratmann R. Enamel
remineralization of teeth adjacent to Class II glass
inonomer restorations. Amer J Dent. 1997;10:247-250.
Forsten L. Fluoride release and uptake by glass
ionomers and related materials and its clinical effect.
Biomaterials. 1998;19:503-508.
Christensen RP, Ploeger BJ, Hollis RA, Croll TP. Release and uptake of fluoride from fluoride-containing
dental materials. J Dent Res [Abstract #1088]. 1998;
77(special issue):241.
Donly KJ, Segura A, Wefel JS, Hogan MM. Evaluating the effects of fluoride-releasing dental materials on
adjacent interproximal caries. JADA. 1999;130:817-825.
Ki-Taeg J, Garca-Godoy F, Donly KJ, Segura A.
Remineralizing effects of glass ionomer restorations on
adjacent interproximal caries. ASDC J Dent Child.
2001;63:125-128.

Croll, Nicholson

66. Marinelli CB, Donly KJ, Wefel JS, Jakobsen JR,

Denehy GE. An in vitro comparison of 3 fluoride regimens on enamel remineralization. Caries Res.
1997;31:418-422.
67. Donly KJ, Nelson JJ. Fluoride release of restorative
materials exposed to a fluoridated dentifrice. ASDC J
Dent Child. 1997;64:249-250.
68. Donly KJ, Istre S, Istre T. In vitro enamel remineralization at orthodontic band margins cemented with
glass inomer cement. Amer J Orthodont Dentofac
Orthoped. 1995;107:461-464.
69. Vorhles AB, Donly KJ, Staley RN, Wefel JS. Enamel
demineralization adjacent to orthodontic brackets
bonded with hybrid glass ionomer cements: An in vitro
study. Amer J Orthodont Dentofac Orthoped.
1998;114:668-674.
70. Clinical Research Associates. Glass ionomer-resin cements (GI-R). Clinical Research Associates Newsletter.
March 1995;19:1-2.
71. Clinical Research Associates: Cement for fixed prosthodonticsUpdate 96. Clinical Research Associates
Newsletter. February 1996;20:1-2.
72. McLean JW, Wilson AD. The clinical development of
the glass ionomer cement. II. Some clinical applications. Aust Dent J. 1977(b);22:120-127.
73. McLean JW, Powis DR, Prosser HJ, Wilson AD. The
use of glass ionomer cements in bonding composite
resins to dentine. Br Dent J. 1985;158:410-414.
74. Wilson AD, Mc Lean JW. Laminate restorations.
Chapter 11. In: Glass Ionomer Cement. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1988:159-178.
75. Mount GJ. Clinical requirements for a successful
sandwichdentine to glass ionomer cement to composite resin. Aust Dent J. 1989;34:259-265.
76. Croll TP. Replacement of defective Class I amalgam
restoration with stratified glass ionomer-composite
resin materials. Quintessence Int. 1989;20:711-716.
77. Croll TP. Class I composite resin restoration. J Esthet
Dent. 1992;4:148-153.
78. Leinfelder KF. Changing restorative traditions: the use
of bases and liners. JADA. 1994;125:65-67.
79. Davidson CL. Glass ionomer bases under posterior
composites. J Esthet Dent. 1994;6:223-224.
80. McLean JW. Dentinal bonding agents vs glass ionomer
cements. Quintessence Int. 1996;27:659-667.
81. Croll TP, Cavanaugh RR. Direct bonded Class I restorations and sealants: Six options. Quintessence Int.
1997;28:157-168.
82. Tolidis K, Nobecourt A, Randall RC. Effect of a resinmodified glass ionomer liner on volumetric
polymerization shrinkage of various composites. Dent
Mater. 1998;14:417-423.
83. Braem MJA. Physical properites of glass ionomer cements: fatigue and elasticity. In: Davidson CL, Mjr
IA, eds. Advances in Glass Ionomer Cements. Berlin/Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1999:67-84.

Glass ionomer cement

Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

84. Eliades G. Chemical and biological properties of glass

ionomer cements. In: Davidson CL, Mjr IA, eds.
Advances in Glass Ionomer Cements. Berlin/Chicago:
Quintessence Publishing Co; 1999:85-101.
85. Watson TF. Bonding glass ionomer cements to tooth
structure. In: Davidson CL, Mjr IA, eds. Advances in
Glass Ionomer Cements. Berlin/Chicago: Quintessence
Publishing Co; 1999:121-135.
86. Ferrari M. Use of glass ionomers as bondings, linings,
or bases. In: Davidson CL, Mjr IA, eds. Advances in
Glass Ionomer Cements. Berlin/Chicago: Quintessence
Publishing Co; 1999:137-148.
87. Burke FJT, Wilson NHF. Glass ionomer restorations
in stress-bearing and difficult-to-access cavities. In:
Davidson CL, Mjr IA, eds. Advances in Glass Ionomer
Cements. Berlin/Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co;
1999:253-258.
88. Mount GJ. Glass ionomers: Advantages, disadvantages,
and future implications. In: Davidson CL, Mjr IA,
eds. Advances in Glass Ionomer Cements. Berlin/Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co; 1999:269-293.
89. Krejci I, Stavridakis M. New perspectives on dentin
adhesion: differing methods of bonding. Pract
Periodont Aesthet Dent. 2000;12:727-732.
90. Croll TP, Cavanaugh RR. Posterior resin-based composite restorations: A second opinion. J Esthet and Rest
Dent. 2002;14:303-312.
91. Bugliarello G. Biomimesis: The road less traveled. The
Bridge. 1997;27(3):2-3.
92. Croll TP, Tyma M. Caries detection using laser fluorescence. Compend Cont Educ Dent. 2001;22:798-804.
93. Croll TP. Rapid setting, encapsulated glass ionomer
restorative cement. Compend Cont Educ Dent.
2001;22:442-448.
94. Smales RJ, Hak-Kong Yip. The atraumatic restorative
treatment (ART) approach for primary teeth: review
of literature. Pediatr Dent. 2000;22:294-298.
95. Ngo H, Mount GJ, Peters MCRB. A study of glass
ionomer cement and its interface with enamel and
dentin using a low-temperature, high resolution scanning elctron microscopic technique. Quintessence Int.
1997;28:63-69.
96. Nicholson JW, Czarnecka B, Limanowska-Shaw H.
The long-term interaction of dental cements with lactic acid solutions. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 1999;
10:449-452.
97. Matsuya S, Matsuya Y, Yamamoto Y. Erosion process
of a glass ionomer cement in organic acids. Dent Mater
J. 1984;3:210-219.
98. Nicholson JW, Aggarwal A, Czarnecka B,
Limanowska-Shaw H. The rate of change of pH of
lactic acid exposed to glass ionomer dental cements.
Biomaterials. 2000;20:1989-1993.

Pediatric Dentistry 24:5, 2002

Glass ionomer manufacturers

It is difficult to make an all-inclusive list of commercially
available glass ionomer products because new products are
constantly introduced and other products are periodically
taken off the market. However, the authors consider it useful to designate the names of manufacturers that offer the
various glass ionomer systems in North America. The authors have not considered polyacid-modified resin-based
composites (compomers) in this listing:
GC America, Inc
(800) 323-3386
(708) 597-0900
www.gcdental.co.jp
3M ESPE Dental Products
(800) 634-2249
(651) 575-5144
www.3MESPE.com
Shofu Dental Corporation
(800) 827-4638
(650) 324-0085
info@shofu.com
Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc
(800) 533-6825
(716) 691-0010
www.ivoclarna.com

Glass ionomer cement

Croll, Nicholson 429